Freeman v. Woolston et al

Filing 111

MINUTE ORDER denying 109 Plaintiff's Motion to Make Inquiry into Order by the Court as to the Status of Appointment of Counsel, by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on 6/25/12.(gmssl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01756-DME-MJW
MARCUS L. FREEMAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
WOOLSTON, Vocational Instructor, and
LIKEN, Education Department,
Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe
It is hereby ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion to Make Inquiry Into Order
(Docket No. 75) by the Court as to the Status of Appointment of Counsel (Docket No.
109) is denied.
This court previously advised plaintiff “that the granting of his request for
appointed counsel does not necessarily mean an attorney will appear on his behalf in
this case. . . . This Order [granting plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel] merely
gives the attorneys on the pro bono panel notice that this case might be appropriate for
pro bono representation and gives them an opportunity to volunteer their time to assist
the plaintiff. . . . [T]his Order does not guarantee that a pro bono attorney will ultimately
appear for the plaintiff . . . .” (Docket No. 75 at 2). Plaintiff’s case has been placed on
the list of civil actions eligible for pro bono counsel. If an attorney is interested in the
possibility of representing plaintiff, plaintiff will be contacted by such attorney. There is
thus no need for the court to ask the Clerk of Court about the status of plaintiff’s
appointment and/or the good faith effort being made by the Clerk of Court.
Date: June 25, 2012